SUPERIOR COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST THOMAS AND ST JOHN
ADARYLL S GUMBS,
PETITIONER, ST 20 MC 013
V Cite as 2020 VI Super 067 WYNNIE TESTAMARK, DIRECTOR OF BUREAU OF CORRECTIONS,
RESPONDENT
Appearances
Adaryil S Gumbs Pro se
OPINION and ORDER
WILLOCKS Presiding Judge
fill THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Petition for Writ of Mandamus (hereinafter
Petition’) of Adaryil S Gumbs filed March 16, 2020 As an initial matter the Court notes that the
certificate of service attached to the Petition indicates that the document was served on the Superior
Court of the Virgin islands in St Thomas, when in fact it should have been served on the Respondent
BACKGROUND
£2 The premise of the Petition is that the Virgin islands Bureau of Corrections (hereinafler
“BOC ) has refused to comply with Title 5 Section 457] (b) which requires that persons convicted for
more than one year receive a reduction in their sentence when they meet certain requirements such as
completing rehabilitation programs or obtaining their GED or higher education degree while
incarcerated 5 V l C § 4571(b) The Petitioner states that since incarceration he has completed his
GED and several workshops which qualify for sentence reduction (Pet 3 See Exhibits to Pet) The
Petitioner asked the warden of the facility where he is incarcerated to notify the BOC and to request
the appropriate sentence reduction (Pet at 4 ) BOC allegedly informed the Petitioner that the sentence Gumbs 1 Terminal]: 2020 VI Super 067 ST 2020 MC 013 OPINION & ORDER Page 2 of5
reduction statute does not apply to him because he was sentenced prior to its effective date July 30,
2015 and that it would not give any time adjustments to the Petitioner (Id) The Petitioner s argument
is that a failure to apply the law to people convicted prior to its effective date violates the U S
Constitution and would work an injustice to those previously incarcerated (Pet at 5 )
STANDARD OF REVIEW
1,8 This Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to Title 5 Section 1361 of the Virgin
Islands Code The Court may issue a mandatory order to any inferior court, corporation board
officer or person to compel the performance of an act which the law specially enjoins as a duty
resulting from an office, trust, or station 5 V l C {5 l36l(a) The order shall not be issued in any
case where there is a plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law Id
DISCUSSION
114 In 1995 the Territorial Court addressed an issue of first impression relating to the Territory’s
‘good time credit’ law See Guadalupe v Ballentme 32 V I 55 (Terr Ct 1995) According to Title 5
Virgin Islands Code Section 457l(a) ‘[e]ach prisoner confined in a prison or jail in the Virgin Islands
for a definite term other than for life’ is eligible for a sentence reduction of six days for each month of
time served during which the prisoner has faithfully observed all the rules and has not been subjected
to punishment 5 V I C § 457 l (a) The Territorial Court considered the question of whether credit
for good behavior should be applied to the total sentence, including that portion which has been
suspended Guadalupe 32 V l at 57
115 While a separate issue from the one presented in this case the Territorial Court found that
[t]he clear intent of the legislature in enacting V I Code Ann tit 5, section 4571 was to encourage
good behavior among the entire prison population ’ 1d at 62 The decision was based on the statutory
construction rule that the intent of the legislature should be deemed to be the law ’ Id at 59 In that
instance the Territorial Court was able to study a historical note that indicated Section 4571 was Gumbs t Testamaik 2020 VI Super 067 ST 2020 MC 013 OPINION & ORDER Page 3 of 5
drafted to match the language of the corresponding federal good time statute, which had already been
interpreted as an encouragement of good behavior for all inmates Id Further the Territorial Court
found that ‘[t]he statutory interpretation which best gives effect to that purpose is that which allows
all prisoners to earn time off their sentences through good behavior Id at 62
$6 This case, the question before the Court is not how credit is applied but to whom Subpart (b)
of Section 4571 states A person convicted and sentenced to confinement for more than one year shall
receive a reduction of sentence as follows,” and lists the circumstances under which credit is earned
5 V IC § 4571(b) There is no historical note to review but the legislature passed the law by veto
override which indicates the legislature 5 strong desire to incentivize inmates to pursue education and
beneficial rehabilitation programs 2015 V 1 ALS 7742 2015 V I Sess Laws 7741 Furthermore the
federal good time statute upon which Section 4571(a) was based in the 19405 does not correspond to
Section 4571(b) Though federal inmates can earn credit for completing certain programs under the
First Step Act that law was enacted in 2018 after Section 4571(b), and it is not an appropriate vehicle
to define this case See First Step Act of2018 Pub L 115 391 (Dec 21 2018)
$[7 Regardless there is no indication that the Virgin islands Legislature s intent in enacting subpart
(b) of Section 4571 is any different than when it enacted subpart (a) That the legislature passed subpart
(b) as an amendment instead of a separate law indicates that the two subparts are linked by purpose
The text of subpart (b) also unambiguously states that it applies to a person convicted and sentenced
for more than one year The plain meaning interpretation of that mandate is that the law applies to all
inmates who fall into that classification ' This is the only interpretation of the statute which gives full
obedience to legislative intent The Court therefore finds that Section 4571(b) applies to all prisoners
in the Virgin Islands (or in the custody of the Virgin Islands BOC while housed in a stateside facility)
1 See footnote 2 Gumbs v Teslamalk 2020 VI Super 067 ST 2020 MC 013 OPINION & ORDER Page 4 of 5
who have been sentenced to confinement for more than one year regardless of when they were
convicted and sentenced 2 In that regard, it is apparent that the Petitioner is correct
$8 However it is the Court’s belief the Petitioner was convicted and sentenced prior to 2000 in
the District Court of the Virgin Islands and placed in the custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons
Thus, before the Court can issue or deny the writ of mandamus other questions must be answered
including whether the Petitioner 5 educational credits were earned while in the custody of BOC or the
Federal Bureau of Prisons A person does not qualify for credit against their sentence unless they are
serving their time in a Virgin Islands prison or jail Graham v Lanflmg, 25 F 3d 203, 30 V 1 404 (3d
Cir V I 1994) Until this information is known the Petitioner does not have a clear right to relief and
the writ cannot issue Also it appears that the Respondent was not properly served in this matter as
required by mandamus procedure As a result there may be additional issues of concern to the
REspondent that need to be addressed but which the Court has overlooked In the interest ofjudicial
economy, the Court will order the Petition and this Order served upon both parties and will order the
Respondent to file a response
CONCLUSION
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
SUPERIOR COURT OF THE VIRGIN ISLANDS DIVISION OF ST THOMAS AND ST JOHN
ADARYLL S GUMBS,
PETITIONER, ST 20 MC 013
V Cite as 2020 VI Super 067 WYNNIE TESTAMARK, DIRECTOR OF BUREAU OF CORRECTIONS,
RESPONDENT
Appearances
Adaryil S Gumbs Pro se
OPINION and ORDER
WILLOCKS Presiding Judge
fill THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Petition for Writ of Mandamus (hereinafter
Petition’) of Adaryil S Gumbs filed March 16, 2020 As an initial matter the Court notes that the
certificate of service attached to the Petition indicates that the document was served on the Superior
Court of the Virgin islands in St Thomas, when in fact it should have been served on the Respondent
BACKGROUND
£2 The premise of the Petition is that the Virgin islands Bureau of Corrections (hereinafler
“BOC ) has refused to comply with Title 5 Section 457] (b) which requires that persons convicted for
more than one year receive a reduction in their sentence when they meet certain requirements such as
completing rehabilitation programs or obtaining their GED or higher education degree while
incarcerated 5 V l C § 4571(b) The Petitioner states that since incarceration he has completed his
GED and several workshops which qualify for sentence reduction (Pet 3 See Exhibits to Pet) The
Petitioner asked the warden of the facility where he is incarcerated to notify the BOC and to request
the appropriate sentence reduction (Pet at 4 ) BOC allegedly informed the Petitioner that the sentence Gumbs 1 Terminal]: 2020 VI Super 067 ST 2020 MC 013 OPINION & ORDER Page 2 of5
reduction statute does not apply to him because he was sentenced prior to its effective date July 30,
2015 and that it would not give any time adjustments to the Petitioner (Id) The Petitioner s argument
is that a failure to apply the law to people convicted prior to its effective date violates the U S
Constitution and would work an injustice to those previously incarcerated (Pet at 5 )
STANDARD OF REVIEW
1,8 This Court has jurisdiction over this matter pursuant to Title 5 Section 1361 of the Virgin
Islands Code The Court may issue a mandatory order to any inferior court, corporation board
officer or person to compel the performance of an act which the law specially enjoins as a duty
resulting from an office, trust, or station 5 V l C {5 l36l(a) The order shall not be issued in any
case where there is a plain, speedy and adequate remedy in the ordinary course of the law Id
DISCUSSION
114 In 1995 the Territorial Court addressed an issue of first impression relating to the Territory’s
‘good time credit’ law See Guadalupe v Ballentme 32 V I 55 (Terr Ct 1995) According to Title 5
Virgin Islands Code Section 457l(a) ‘[e]ach prisoner confined in a prison or jail in the Virgin Islands
for a definite term other than for life’ is eligible for a sentence reduction of six days for each month of
time served during which the prisoner has faithfully observed all the rules and has not been subjected
to punishment 5 V I C § 457 l (a) The Territorial Court considered the question of whether credit
for good behavior should be applied to the total sentence, including that portion which has been
suspended Guadalupe 32 V l at 57
115 While a separate issue from the one presented in this case the Territorial Court found that
[t]he clear intent of the legislature in enacting V I Code Ann tit 5, section 4571 was to encourage
good behavior among the entire prison population ’ 1d at 62 The decision was based on the statutory
construction rule that the intent of the legislature should be deemed to be the law ’ Id at 59 In that
instance the Territorial Court was able to study a historical note that indicated Section 4571 was Gumbs t Testamaik 2020 VI Super 067 ST 2020 MC 013 OPINION & ORDER Page 3 of 5
drafted to match the language of the corresponding federal good time statute, which had already been
interpreted as an encouragement of good behavior for all inmates Id Further the Territorial Court
found that ‘[t]he statutory interpretation which best gives effect to that purpose is that which allows
all prisoners to earn time off their sentences through good behavior Id at 62
$6 This case, the question before the Court is not how credit is applied but to whom Subpart (b)
of Section 4571 states A person convicted and sentenced to confinement for more than one year shall
receive a reduction of sentence as follows,” and lists the circumstances under which credit is earned
5 V IC § 4571(b) There is no historical note to review but the legislature passed the law by veto
override which indicates the legislature 5 strong desire to incentivize inmates to pursue education and
beneficial rehabilitation programs 2015 V 1 ALS 7742 2015 V I Sess Laws 7741 Furthermore the
federal good time statute upon which Section 4571(a) was based in the 19405 does not correspond to
Section 4571(b) Though federal inmates can earn credit for completing certain programs under the
First Step Act that law was enacted in 2018 after Section 4571(b), and it is not an appropriate vehicle
to define this case See First Step Act of2018 Pub L 115 391 (Dec 21 2018)
$[7 Regardless there is no indication that the Virgin islands Legislature s intent in enacting subpart
(b) of Section 4571 is any different than when it enacted subpart (a) That the legislature passed subpart
(b) as an amendment instead of a separate law indicates that the two subparts are linked by purpose
The text of subpart (b) also unambiguously states that it applies to a person convicted and sentenced
for more than one year The plain meaning interpretation of that mandate is that the law applies to all
inmates who fall into that classification ' This is the only interpretation of the statute which gives full
obedience to legislative intent The Court therefore finds that Section 4571(b) applies to all prisoners
in the Virgin Islands (or in the custody of the Virgin Islands BOC while housed in a stateside facility)
1 See footnote 2 Gumbs v Teslamalk 2020 VI Super 067 ST 2020 MC 013 OPINION & ORDER Page 4 of 5
who have been sentenced to confinement for more than one year regardless of when they were
convicted and sentenced 2 In that regard, it is apparent that the Petitioner is correct
$8 However it is the Court’s belief the Petitioner was convicted and sentenced prior to 2000 in
the District Court of the Virgin Islands and placed in the custody of the Federal Bureau of Prisons
Thus, before the Court can issue or deny the writ of mandamus other questions must be answered
including whether the Petitioner 5 educational credits were earned while in the custody of BOC or the
Federal Bureau of Prisons A person does not qualify for credit against their sentence unless they are
serving their time in a Virgin Islands prison or jail Graham v Lanflmg, 25 F 3d 203, 30 V 1 404 (3d
Cir V I 1994) Until this information is known the Petitioner does not have a clear right to relief and
the writ cannot issue Also it appears that the Respondent was not properly served in this matter as
required by mandamus procedure As a result there may be additional issues of concern to the
REspondent that need to be addressed but which the Court has overlooked In the interest ofjudicial
economy, the Court will order the Petition and this Order served upon both parties and will order the
Respondent to file a response
CONCLUSION
19 In sum inmates sentenced within the Virgin Islands for a period more than one year are eligible
for sentence reduction under Title 5, Section 4571(b), regardless of whether they were sentenced prior
to 2015 because it is the intent of the Virgin islands Legislature that the statute incentivize education
and rehabilitation of inmates However, there are unresolved matters in this case and the Respondent
was not properly served with the Petition Therefore the Court must give the Respondent the
opportunity to respond and address the remaining issues Accordingly it is hereby
2 In Section 4571(a), the statute specifically states that those sentenced to life imprisonment cannot expect to receive good time credit The issue of whether Section 457 1(b) git es credit to those sening life sentences is not reached here Gumbs v Teslamaik 2020 Vi Super 067 ST 2020 MC 013 OPINION & ORDER Page 5 of 5
ORDERED that the CLERK OF THE COURT serve the Petition for Writ of Mandamus and
this Order on the Respondent through the Attorney General’s Office It is further
ORDERED that the Respondent file and serve its response to the Petition by SEPTEMBER
11, 2020 When the Petitioner receives a copy of the response he may file a reply within TWENTY
ONE (21) DAYS of receipt gin DONE and so ORDERED this is) Y day of AUGUST 2020
ATTEST / é/ E 3 / I 427 14/ i f// fA N / //
Tamara Charles AR LD W L WILLOCKS Clerk of the Court Presiding Judge of the Superior Court
‘3“ <- 251’ mi ’ ’ cw Supervisor
Dated ‘l/I r
SERVICE LIST Denise N George, Esq , Attorney General Adaryll S Gumbs, Petitioner 34 38 Kronprindsens Gade Citrus County Detention Facility GERS Building 2nd Floor 2604 W Woodland Ridge Dr St Thomas USVI 00802 Lecanto FL 34461